Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Network theory is based on the idea that human behavior can be most fully accounted for by an understanding of the structure of social relations within which actors are situated. Network theorists assume that these structures have a more profound impact on behavior than do norms, values, or other subjective states. Network theory is distinct from network analysis, which is a set of techniques that apply network theoretical ideas. This essay will focus on the former, although it will include references to the latter.

The Roots of Network Theory

Network theory is a branch of structural sociology. In structural sociology, human action is viewed as a function of the constraints and opportunities provided by forces that exist outside the individual. The roots of structural sociology go back to the works of Karl Marx, Émile Durkheim, and Georg Simmel, but the approach emerged in contemporary sociology in reaction to the dominance of the earlier normative approach. The structural critique of the normative approach is examined in this section, followed by a discussion showing how network theory constitutes a unique version of structural sociology.

Normative Sociology in the Mid-Twentieth Century

Sociology in the West, especially in the United States, was dominated between the 1930s and the early 1970s by a perspective variously termed the normative, order, or functionalist approach. In this view, societies were seen as largely stable entities held together by shared values (generalized beliefs) and norms (expectations of behavior). The primary proponent of this approach, which drew on one version of Durkheimian theory, was Talcott Parsons. The shared values and norms at the root of this approach were viewed as learned through socialization, primarily from family, school, and the larger culture. For norms to operate effectively, it was necessary that they be internalized—that is, taken for granted. Without the existence of internalized norms, the only way to maintain social order was by an intensive system of monitoring. Such a system was ultimately unworkable, however, since without internalized norms there were no assurances that the monitors themselves would behave appropriately.

Given the importance of shared norms and values, the empirical research that emerged from this model focused heavily on the attitudes of individuals, which were assumed to reflect the values that they held. This led to the proliferation of survey research, which dominated much sociology in the West in the period after World War II. Sociology, which had begun as the study of social structure, increasingly focused on distributions of individual characteristics and attitudes.

A primary difficulty with the normative model was that it was extremely difficult to verify the existence of internalized norms. First, a number of studies indicated that attitudes and behavior were often not highly correlated. Second, even when actors behaved in accordance with accepted norms, it was rarely possible to know whether the behavior resulted from the internalization of the norms or from a fear of sanctions. When someone refrains from stealing something, for example, is it because he or she has internalized the norm that stealing is wrong or because he or she fears the possibility of being caught?

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading